Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  the principle of freedom of contract
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Delegating members of the supervisory board of a limited liability company to act in the management board

100%
Lewandowski P.
Acta Iuris Stetinensis
|
2019
|
issue 27_ENG
115-133
EN
So far, it has not been decided whether a limited liability company may delegate a member of the supervisory board to temporarily perform the duties of a member of the management board. Practice is in favour of this possibility, while the doctrine expresses diverse views. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the subject matter in question. The principle of freedom of contract under company law and differences in the regulation of partnerships and capital companies, including the method of appointing the management board, are pointed out. It discusses the consequences of the assessment of delegation in the absence of explicit regulation, as well as the absence of a referral to use Article 383 of the Commercial Companies Code analogically. It demonstrates a number of doubts which are caused by delegation (when the thesis about its admissibility is approved), in particular the status of the delegate (the question of the continued existence of a legal relationship in the supervisory board). The paper employs the dogmatic method. The conclusion is that delegating a member of the supervisory board in a limited liability company de lege lata is not acceptable. However, it is desirable, which is why it should have a regulation modelled on Article 383 § 1 CCC.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zakaz praktyk nieuczciwie wykorzystujących przewagę kontraktową jako reguła kontraktowa przy zawieraniu umów z rolnikami

71%
Hejbudzki M.
Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne
|
2018
|
vol. 16
|
issue 2
63-81
PL
The existing legal instruments in the area of trade in agricultural and food products in Poland were considered by the Polish legislature to be insufficient, which was an impetus for legislative work finalized by the adoption of the act on counteracting the unfair use of contractual advantage in the trade in agricultural and food products on 15 December 2016. The purpose of the research described in the article was to determine the normative dimension of the concept of unfair use of contractual advantage and the assessment of admissibility de lege lata for farmers to rely on protection under the provisions of the aforementioned Act of 2016. The analyses have led to the conclusion that the ban on practices of unfair use of contractual advantage should be seen as a new, not yet crystallized, contract rule applicable to concluding contracts specified in this act, including contracts with farmers.
3

Delegowanie członka rady nadzorczej spółki z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością do pełnienia funkcji w zarządzie

63%
Lewandowski P.
Acta Iuris Stetinensis
|
2019
|
issue 27
117-135
PL
Dotychczas nie zostało jednoznacznie przesądzone, czy w spółce z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością jest dopuszczalne delegowanie członka rady nadzorczej do czasowego wykonywania funkcji członka zarządu. Praktyka wskazuje na taką możliwość, w doktrynie zaś wyrażane są różne poglądy w tej materii. Celem pracy uczyniono analizę przedmiotowego zagadnienia. Zwrócono uwagę na zasadę wolności umów na gruncie prawa spółek oraz różnice występujące w regulacji spółek osobowych i kapitałowych, w tym w sposobie powoływania zarządu. Omówiono konsekwencje oceny delegowania wobec braku wyraźnej regulacji, jak i braku odesłania do stosowania per analogiam art. 383 k.s.h. Wskazano na wiele wątpliwości, jakie wywołuje delegowanie (w przypadku aprobaty tezy o jego dopuszczalności), w szczególności status osoby delegowanej (kwestia dalszego trwania stosunku prawnego w radzie nadzorczej). W pracy zastosowano metodę dogmatyczną. W konkluzji stwierdzono, że delegowanie członka rady nadzorczej w spółce z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnością de lege lata nie jest dopuszczalne. Jest jednak pożądane, wobec czego powinno zostać uregulowane na wzór art. 383 § 1 k.s.h.
EN
So far, it has not been decided whether a limited liability company may delegate a member of the supervisory board to temporarily perform the duties of a member of the management board. Practice is in favour of this possibility, while the doctrine expresses diverse views. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the subject matter in question. The principle of freedom of contract under company law and differences in the regulation of partnerships and capital companies, including the method of appointing the management board, are pointed out. It discusses the consequences of the assessment of delegation in the absence of explicit regulation, as well as the absence of a referral to use Article 383 of the Commercial Companies Code analogically. It demonstrates a number of doubts which are caused by delegation (when the thesis about its admissibility is approved), in particular the status of the delegate (the question of the continued existence of a legal relationship in the supervisory board). The paper employs the dogmatic method. The conclusion is that delegating a member of the supervisory board in a limited liability company de lege lata is not acceptable. However, it is desirable, which is why it should have a regulation modelled on Article 383 § 1 CCC.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.